Subject: knight
Culture: Tudor English
Setting: early Tudor dynasty, England early-mid 16thc
Context (Event Photos, Period Sources, Secondary Sources, Field Notes)
* Gravett/Turner 2006 p4
"Knighthood in the Tudor period had come a long way since 1066. Increasingly, knights could be made from gentlemen who did not have a knightly background, while other eligible candidates were content to remain squires -- men of standing, yet happy to forego the expense and the burdens of sitting in parliament or attending law courts. Those who fought often did so as officers in an increasingly professional army."
* Arnold 2001 p86
"The Renaissance transformation of warfare challenged Europe's traditional military élite -- the knightly aristocracy -- to reconsider and reinvent their place and purpose on the battlefield. This challenge was a subtle one. It was not the coming of gunpowder, nor the new military architecture, nor the new infantry tactics that directly threatened the existence or importance of the old, medieval military elite who were, of course, Europe's social and political élite as well. Indeed, with exceptions, the nobility would continue to dominate the leadership of European states and armies for centuries to come .... During the Renaissance military, technical and tactical changes caused no real social or political revolution in the control of war. In fact the Renaissance transformation of warfare was only made possible by the enthusiasm of the old élite for new weapons and new techniques, and this passion for experiment win no way entailed a conscious rejection of any medieval military heritage. Innovation and tradition comfortably coexisted. An example of this case comes in the person of Henry VIII of England, who both collected firearms and practised his archery, and who hired Italian captains to modernize his soldiers' infantry drill while importing German craftsmen to manufacture exquisite custom-made armour. It is also worth remembering that almost every single major military reformer of the period was a titled noble by birth."
"Not always blessed with good leaders and hampered by corruption at all levels, the armies of Tudor England still had mounted knights as their main shock troops. Chivalry was still alive, with tournaments held before the sovereigns (such as the well known Field of Cloth of Gold in 1520), and books printed to inspire valiant deeds, but this did not mean that men with a knightly background were always eager to fight. Many other activities such as business and politics were becoming popular among the nobility. When recalled, the nobles went to war with their own retinues and the monarchs did not feel the need to have a standing army. Things were slowly changing, though: handgunners increased in number while the bow became obsolete, the artillery train was brought up to date.
"It was popular unrest, alarming but at the same time lacking training and equipment, which more than once kept the Tudor armies busy in England. There were also plenty of chances to fight abroad. France, Scotland, Spain and Portugal saw the English go into action, but it was Ireland, with its boggy and woody terrain and guerrilla warfare, which provided different experience."
* Erickson 1980 p151-152
"[T]he nobles greatly resented Henry [VIII]'s strong mastery over them. Their ancestral place in government was being disregarded, their ancestral prerogatives overlooked. Instead of ruling alongside the king they were overruled by him, while men of lesser rank served him in the work of governing. He 'wished the nobles would break their minds,' the duke [of Buckingham] complained to one of his officers, revealing the extent of their displeasure, 'for few of them were contented, they were so unkindly handled.' For a great aristocrat to keep his grievances silent was an intolerable humiliation. Buckingham roared out his feelings, speaking his fate: 'he would rather die than be ordered as he was.'
What the English nobility of the 1520s saw as an affront to their personal status was in truth part of a shift in governmental power that had been under way for more than a generation. Ideas of honor and precedence formed in feudal times persisted, but in reality men such as Buckingham were not the prepotent lords they had once been. They still kept barrels full of suits of armor in their castles, ready to arm their fighting men as their medieval ancestors had done, but their old power was waning. Comfort and luxury more than the need for defense now determined the structure of their castles; they thought less often of enforcing their rights through warfare than of displaying their rank through fine clothes, a costly table, and splendid entertainments. And as their tastes shifted toward grandeur their incomes -- derived from fixed rents in a time of rising costs -- declined, enfeebling them still further and making the kind of stalwart opposition Buckingham wished for even more remote.
"Henry could not afford to take comfort from these changes, though, for he had to confront not abstract forces but arrogant, lordly men, men bred to violence whose family histories were scarred with tumult and local warfare. Provoked too far, such men could become disloyal, if they should rebel there was little enough to stand between them and their sovereign. Though he boasted to foreign envoys that he had 'more money and greater force and authority' than his ancestors had ever possessed, Henry had no standing army and was not well prepared for internal lawlessness. His coastal and border fortresses were barely satisfactory, but few other royal castles were in condition to be used. Many were in ruins, their fallen walls and crumbling battlements plundered for building materials. Others, though usable to some extent, were in severe decay; only a handful were 'metely strong' to resist assault. Henry could not afford to risk a baronial rebellion, and the dissatisfaction now spoken of made him uneasy."
* Ridley 2002 p53-54
"Tudor society was based on clearly recognized distinctions of class and rank. Under the King was the nobility, who sat in the upper House of Parliament, the House of Lords. Compared with the eight or nine hundred peers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there were very few nobles. In the middle of the fifteenth century, before the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses, there were sixty-four peers in England; but nearly half of them died without heirs during the Wars of the Roses, and when Henry VII became King in 1485 there were only thirty-eight. But it is an over-simplification to say that the Wars of the Roses eliminated the nobility. It was not unusual for nobles to be killed in battle at an early age before they had produced an heir, apart from the cases of early deaths from natural causes. The new factor was that Henry VII did not replenish the nobility by creating new peers as earlier kings had done.
"This was probably because of his reluctance to create a powerful class of nobles who could challenge his authority and renew the civil wars. He carried this policy to the lengths of not appointing noblemen to the great offices of state -- the Lord Deputy of Ireland, and the Wardens of the Marches who guarded the northern frontier against the Scots. Instead he held these offices himself, or granted them to his infant children, leaving the real work of the offices to be performed by Deputy Wardens, for the deputies would not normally be noblemen, but merely knights and gentlemen. He created very few new peerages, though he made his uncle, Jasper Tudor, Duke of Bedford, his stepfather, Lord Stanley, Earl of Derby, and his Breton general at Bosworth, Philibert de Chaudée, Earl of Bath. Henry VIII reversed his father's policy, and created a number of new peers early in his reign, and new peerages were created by Edward VI, Mary and Elizabeth I. The result was that in the sixteenth century nearly all the nobility were new parvenus."
Armor
* Dowen/Hurst 2020 p20
"The Renaissance was renowned for its outstanding artistic achievements. It was an age when men of wealth actively encouraged artists and craftsmen to give full rein to their creativity, resulting in paintings and sculptures of incredible beauty. Armour likewise reached new heights of sophistication. Far from merely serving a defensive purpose, a suit of armour was also a visual art form, expressing the wealth and status of the wearer. Artistic patronage upheld social status in a deeply hierarchical society, a point of crucial importance in a changing world."
* Boutell 1907 p206
"At the commencement of the 16th century, the pointed sollerets were succeeded by broad sabbatons, cut off square or rounded at the toes. Skirts of mail at this time again came into use. The armour generally became more massive, and the fashion began to prevail for adorning it with elaborate enrichments. Plumes of flowing feathers were attached to helms."
* Gravett/Turner 2006 p16
"Men of rank wore full harness of steel that covered them from top to toe. Initially this might not differ from that worn at the end of the 15th century, a western European style derived from Italian forms with some German influences."
* Richardson 2019 p6-7
"It is quite clear that English production was not up to the standard of the Flemish (or Italian or Austrian) craftsmen, and it is clear that Henry wished to have his own armour workshop, just like Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian (1459-1519). Accordingly from 1511 Henry made several attempts to set up workshops, in Southwark and Greenwich. Both these locations are south of the river Thames and hence outside the City of London where the London Companies and craft guilds held sway. ... The early experiment with the Milanese, including Filippo de Grampis and Giovanni Angelo de Littis who were working there from 1512, did not prove long-lasting as they were gone by about 1515. But the Flemings and Germans were to prove more permanent."
* Royal Armouries Museum > Tudor Power and Glory
"A New Start for English Armour There are no known surviving English armours from before 1511 when the Greenwich Armoury opened. Henry [VIII] wanted to set a new standard.
"Not only was the inspiration for the new armours taken from Europe, but also the materials, the methods and the men. Henry employed Italian armourers then quickly took on men from the Holy Roman Empire. He wanted Greenwich to be as innovative, successful and influential as the European court armouries that he had so admired."
Costume
* Condra 2009 p69-70 (Sara M Harvey, "The northern Renaissance" p61-78)
"The early years of the [16th] century focused on a slim silhouette, but soon it filled out into a series of bulky areas that were padded and puffed and slashed to reveal the colorful lining beneath. This style was referred to as slashings or panes. The story behind the origin of this fashion is attributed to the Swiss army, whose soldiers supposedly stuffed the colorful banners and garments of the enemy into their own clothing for warmth, the swatches of fabric showing in the tears in their own clothes. Both the Swiss and the Germans were both [SIC] known for wearing uniforms of multicolored fabric, decorated with slashings and panes showing contrasting colors beneath. While the colors were rich jewel tones in Germany, when this style migrated to England it was adopted in more subdued colors.
"Shirts, doublets, and jerkins did not change very much through the middle of the century. Instead of a separate base, doublets were being cut with the skirting attached. This was less full than the separate base. Bases were still worn with armor and by military men. Doublets were often cut with a wide U- or V-shaped neckline to show the shirt beneath. Sleeves were made very wide to the elbow and then more form fitting to the wrist. Some sleeves were short and puffed or slashed, others were long sleeves that could hang loose or be worn closed with the sleeves pulled through the decorative openings.
"Hose were still laced into the doublets. In this period, the hose was beginning to be divided into upper stocks and nether stocks. The codpiece was still used as a center front closure of the hose. Codpieces could be made padded and shaped into interesting forms. Upper stocks grew more bulky and came to be a distinct piece separate from the nether hose. The upper stocks were also called breeches, a name that would become the principal term for these pants. Breeches were constructed in various forms. The basic breeches were moderately full and could be worn just above or just below the knee, but some were very full and rounded and barely reached past the hips. The breeches could be slashed or paned and almost always matched the doublet. Overall, the look was very thickly padded through the shoulders and the hips. Men in England fashioned their clothes after their larger-than-life monarch Henry VIII, who prided himself on his appearance. Nationals allied with or friendly toward England, such as the Low Countries and Germany, also followed these bombastic styles."
* Ashdown 1910 p209-210
"The configuration of a male dress distinguishing the reign of Henry VIII. was directly derived from the broad-shouldered doublet of Henry VII., which again was undoubtedly of German origin; the burly frame of the English monarch set off this Teutonic costume to the fullest advantage, and it naturally followed that court and country alike quickly adopted it. There is to a certain extent no great change perceivable in men's dress during this reign, and the coronation of Henry VIII., as shown in the Islip Roll, fully exemplifies this; a stereotyped fashion appears to have been adopted in the first part of it, and almost rigidly adhered to during the succeeding years. It may be briefly summed up as an aggregation of extreme breadth combined with narrowness; great width of body made the lower limbs appear attenuated, extreme width of the toes made the ankles appear ludicrously small. Such width of body has never been surpassed in English costume, and we can fully appreciate the dismay of those who had been blessed by nature with a spare habit of body."
* Lipscomb 2009 p19-20
"Everyone had their place and station; all men were not created equal. This fact was displayed even in what people wore. Sumptuary laws governed the dress of each rank of society: no man under the degree of a lord could wear cloth of gold or silver, or sable (the brown fur of the arctic fox). Only Knights of the Garter and above could wear crimson or blue velvet. No person under knight could wear gowns or doublets of velvet. Those who owned land yielding £20 a year might wear satin or damask in the doublets, while husbandry servants, shepherds and labourers were forbidden to wear cloth costing more than two shillings a yard. The penalty for the latter was three days in the stocks. The threat of such punishment represented the belief that dissatifaction with one's lot could engender disorder, injustice and anarchy."
* Gravett/Turner 2006 p28-29
"Sumptuary laws were designed to ensure that men's position in society was reflected in their dress and appearance. Henry VIII produced the following version of the laws:
None shall wear ... cloth of gold or silver, or silk of purple colour ... except ... Earls, all above that rank, and Knights of the King (and then only in their mantles). None shall wear ... cloth of gold or silver, tinselled satin, silk, cloth mixed or embroidered with gold or silver, or foreign woollen cloth ... except ... Barons, all above that rank, Knights of the Garter, and Privy Councillors. None shall wear ... any lace of gold or silver, lace mixed with gold or silver, silk, spurs, swords, rapiers, daggers, buckles, or studes with gold, silver or gilt ... except ... Baron's Sons, all above that rank, shall wear ... velvet in gowns, cloaks, coats, or upper garments, or embroidery with silk, or hose of silk ... except ... Knights, all above that rank, and their heirs apparent. None shall wear ... velvet, upper garments, or velvet in their jerkins, hose or doublets ... except ... Knight's Eldest Sons and all above that rank."
Sword
* Gravett/Turner 2006 p21-22
"The sword remained the favoured arm of the gentleman. Military weapons at the beginning of the 16th century still had long thrusting blades but were wide enough to deliver a lethal cut from the sharpened edges. The hilt was still essentially a simple cross, the wooden grip bound in cloth or leather and often overlaid by cords or wire either twined round or in a lattice, to help prevent the hand sliding off but more importantly provided counterbalance to the blade, so that the point of balance was as near to the hand as possible; this made the sword less point-heavy and less tiring to use. Several styles of pommel had been developed, from a simple disc or flanged wheel to a scent-bottle style. This type of cross-hilt continued to be worn with armour by a few enthusiasts until after the third quarter of the 16th century. However, by the beginning of the century some infantry swords had already developed a half loop or a ring to guard the finger hooked over the blunted first section of blade to assist a swing. This form was then seen on the swords of gentlemen. By mid-century swords usually had finger-rings and side-rings, but frequently lacked the knuckle-guards and displayed none of the diagonal guards popular in Continental Europe. The estoc was also known in England as the tuck. The blade sometimes had three or even four unsharpened sides to produce a very stiff weapon for maximum thrust."
Dagger
* Gravett/Turner 2006 p27
"Daggers were carried in a sheath on the right side, two staples on the locket attaching to the waist belt."
* Norris 1938 p239
"The anelace, dirk, misericorde, poignard, and the Italian stiletto are all varieties of the dagger."
Jewelry
* Norris 1938 p346
"Henry VIII had a great passion for jewels and jewellery, and this naturally inspired the wealthy nobles, especially the 'Novi Homines,' to indulge in great display. More frequent interchange of commerce with the Continent was responsible for this love of jewellery. To-day we might call it a vulgar show of opulence, but to give the Tudors due credit they really admired precious stones set in masterpieces of the goldsmith's art, not only for their intrinsic value, but, above all, for their beauty.
"[....] A great deal of the most finished jewellery worn by both sexes of the nobility was created by master-craftsmen in Italy followed by those of France, southern Germany, and Flanders. Many of these came to England, and were employed by the King and his courtiers. Native craftsmen were not far behind their Continental rivals in the excellence of their work, but it continued on the old outlines until some time after the Reformation."
* Norris 1938 p351
"As in the last reign, gold chains were very popular, and their massiness was carried to great excess."
